RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02228 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He took the blame for the possession of drugs which belonged to an individual who was currently undergoing drug rehabilitation. He thought he would not face much, if any disciplinary action, because he had a good record. However, his counsel advised him that he would either go to jail or receive a general discharge, so he chose the latter of the two. It was not until six months prior to the end of his four year commitment that he discovered the type of discharge he was to receive. He returned home on 11 January 1975 and began working two weeks later at a Firestone Tire Factory. He worked there for 23 years until having his second heart attack, which led him to be medically retired. He then entered the financial service business and excelled to owning his own small firm. He has lived a good life and served his community. He would like his discharge upgraded to honorable in order to display it in his office, to join the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) as requested by his Dad, and have an American Flag draped over his coffin to show his family that he served his country the same as his Dad and Grandfather. He met the review board in 1976 and was told to return in one year to have his discharge upgraded to an honorable. However, in 1977, he discovered that he had cancer, which took many years for him to overcome. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 8 June 1971. On 11 January 1975, the applicant was furnished an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge in the grade of sergeant (E-4) and issued a DD Form 258AF, Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He was credited with three years, seven months, and 4 days of active service. On 20 September 1976, the applicant initiated a DD Form 293, Application For Review of Discharge or Separation From The Armed Forces of The United States, requesting his UOTHC discharge be upgraded to an honorable. On 16 February 1977, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable and concluded that the discharge should be changed to general. On 5 June 2014, a request for post-service information was forwarded to applicant for comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). In response, the applicant submitted documentation which indicates that according to the Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a search of the fingerprints provided by the applicant revealed no prior arrest data at the FBI, effective 19 August 2014. In addition he submitted an article written by his Dad (Exhibit D). THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we are not persuaded that corrective action is warranted. While the Air Force Discharge Review Board was compelled to upgrade the applicant’s under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to general (under honorable conditions) discharge, we find no basis to recommend a further upgrade of the applicant’s discharge characterization to fully honorable. In this respect, we not that this Board, in the interest of justice, can recommend the upgrade of a discharge based on clemency when an applicant has brought forth evidence of personal contributions to society since his or her discharge that are so substantial that they overcome the misconduct for which he or she was discharged. However, having no such showing in this case, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02228 in Executive Session on 3 March 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 May 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Upgrade of Discharge – Clemency Bulletin. Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 2 September 2014, w/atchs.